Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[nwdiver]

Megafires More Frequent Because Of Climate Change And Forest Management

The difference is we've learned our lesson from decades of misguided forest management and have generally corrected them. But we're still acting like fools in regards to climate change with our pathetic addiction to fools fuel.

 

[mspohr]

These Wind Patterns Explain Why California Is Now on Fire

Wind

 

[nwdiver]

If you enjoy South Park humor this is a pretty amusing analogy....

 

[WannabeOwner]

This is why we must buy our own solar and buy from countries that decrease their pollution output.

Your graph makes the USA look like a saint ...

 

[mspohr]

World has no capacity to absorb new fossil fuel plants, warns IEA
World has no capacity to absorb new fossil fuel plants, warns IEA

We cannot build any more fossil fueled infrastructure.
That will be tough.
“We are eating up 95% of the [carbon] budget, even if we don’t do anything else. Which of course is impossible, not building any more trucks or power plants,” Birol said.

In total, the IEA calculated that existing infrastructure would “lock in” 550 gigatonnes of of carbon dioxide over the next 22 years. That leaves only 40 gigatonnes, or around a year’s worth of emissions, of wriggle room if temperatures are not to overshoot the 2C threshold."

 

[mspohr]

What would a smog-free city look like?
What would a smog-free city look like?

Focus on things cities can (and are) doing to clean up the air.

 

[ZsoZso]

World has no capacity to absorb new fossil fuel plants, warns IEA
World has no capacity to absorb new fossil fuel plants, warns IEA

We cannot build any more fossil fueled infrastructure.
That will be tough.
“We are eating up 95% of the [carbon] budget, even if we don’t do anything else. Which of course is impossible, not building any more trucks or power plants,” Birol said.

In total, the IEA calculated that existing infrastructure would “lock in” 550 gigatonnes of of carbon dioxide over the next 22 years. That leaves only 40 gigatonnes, or around a year’s worth of emissions, of wriggle room if temperatures are not to overshoot the 2C threshold."

Honestly, at this point the only chance I see for the majority of people / politicians to get off their back-side and start major change in behaviour and policy regarding fossil fuel burning is if climate change hits us real hard, e.g. if Florida and New York is inundated. Only when Wall street is literally underwater will the deep pocket puppet-masters of society wake up that something has to be changed.

Mind you, at that point it is probably too late to avert global catastrophe.

 

[mspohr]

Honestly, at this point the only chance I see for the majority of people / politicians to get off their back-side and start major change in behaviour and policy regarding fossil fuel burning is if climate change hits us real hard, e.g. if Florida and New York is inundated. Only when Wall street is literally underwater will the deep pocket puppet-masters of society wake up that something has to be changed.

Mind you, at that point it is probably too late to avert global catastrophe.

I think Wall Street literally was inundated a few years ago by hurricane Sandy and it didn't seem to change their thinking. Still focused on short term profit.

 

[ohmman]

I think Wall Street literally was inundated a few years ago by hurricane Sandy and it didn't seem to change their thinking. Still focused on short term profit.

This is why legislation and/or heavy government incentives and disincentives are the only way to make a dent. Assuming that education to create voluntary change is going to do anything fast enough is, in my opinion, an exercise in futility.

 

[ZsoZso]

This is why legislation and/or heavy government incentives and disincentives are the only way to make a dent. Assuming that education to create voluntary change is going to do anything fast enough is, in my opinion, an exercise in futility.

I agree, but that level of political change will only happen if the financial leadership is scared enough to stop fighting with FUD against the scientific consensus. I am very skeptical when it comes to believing that governments actually look out for what is best for the majority versus the richest minority who writes them cheques...

 

[Merrill]

Unfortunately it always come down to money, if for some reason something happens that stops the flow of money the powers that be might wake up. Like zso zso says by then it probably is to late, if they cannot see what is obviously happening right now I do not think it looks good for the future.

 

[mspohr]

I agree, but that level of political change will only happen if the financial leadership is scared enough to stop fighting with FUD against the scientific consensus. I am very skeptical when it comes to believing that governments actually look out for what is best for the majority versus the richest minority who writes them cheques...

Well, the coal industry going bankrupt didn't seem to upset them too much. Oil industry may be next. (Fracking seems to be a house of cards ready to fall.) The rest of the oil industry is trying to ignore the stranded assets elephant... and so far they are oblivious. Most major automakers have done a good job of PR about EVs but very little in the way of actually making EVs... they too may be facing a severe ICE technology stranded asset problem (BMW looks particularly vulnerable but Daimler is also late to the game). I think GM and Ford are dead men walking. VW is showing some signs of life after being kicked in the face by dieselgate but they, too, may be late to the game.

Yes, government is our only hope but unfortunately, they have been captured by fossil fuel, etc. interests so they don't seem capable of any action unless people are rioting in the streets (and it is coming to that).

 

[SageBrush]

Yes, government is our only hope but unfortunately, they have been captured by fossil fuel,

I am sorry to say that in the US at least, the political class is following the will of the majority.

 

[dhrivnak]

I am sorry to say that in the US at least, the political class is following the will of the majority.

What do you mean as Trump did lose the popular vote.

 

[SageBrush]

What do you mean as Trump did lose the popular vote.

Sure, but Trump is just the psychopathic tip of an idiotic iceberg. Look at polls of the populace that ask about responses to AGW that cost more money than the out-of-pocket status-quo.

 

[mspohr]

Well, the coal industry going bankrupt didn't seem to upset them too much. Oil industry may be next. (Fracking seems to be a house of cards ready to fall.) The rest of the oil industry is trying to ignore the stranded assets elephant... and so far they are oblivious. Most major automakers have done a good job of PR about EVs but very little in the way of actually making EVs... they too may be facing a severe ICE technology stranded asset problem (BMW looks particularly vulnerable but Daimler is also late to the game). I think GM and Ford are dead men walking. VW is showing some signs of life after being kicked in the face by dieselgate but they, too, may be late to the game.

Yes, government is our only hope but unfortunately, they have been captured by fossil fuel, etc. interests so they don't seem capable of any action unless people are rioting in the streets (and it is coming to that).

Here's a clear explanation of the link between our oligarchic governments and climate destruction.
The Earth is in a death spiral. It will take radical action to save us
The Earth is in a death spiral. It will take radical action to save us | George Monbiot

And an example of how this works
G20 nations still led by fossil fuel industry, climate report finds
G20 nations still led by fossil fuel industry, climate report finds

 

[SageBrush]

What do you mean as Trump did lose the popular vote.

I cannot edit my previous reply so here is another: I was not saying that the majority prevails in all instances in the US, but it has in this case of AGW response (or lack thereof.)

I would go so far as to say that AGW actually gets a lot more attention than it deserves just going by the popular demand. Consider this anecdote: I am active in my community in promoting clean energy, both on a a private residential scale where I volunteer my time to help any neighbor who asks for free help in PV installation, to advocacy at our electric co-op. At the last co-op meeting the board was updated on a plan to install a 2.2 MW PV array. It as been derailed by a developer demand that would set the PPA kWh cost at 0.1 cents per kWh more expensive than the coal sourced alternative product. The interesting context here is that the majority of the board are not AGW denialists; in fact they probably self-identify as either democrats or progressives. When I say derail, I mean that there was ZERO discussion about paying more for clean energy than the status-quo coal product. Even though we are talking about a ~ 80 cents increase in the residential monthly bill for a complete replacement of coal with clean energy.

Know your enemy: it is the clear majority.

 

[voyager]

What electric vehicle sales say about transition off fossil fuels

By
Daniel Sperling is Distinguished Blue Planet Prize professor of Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy and founding director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis. He is a board member of the California Air Resources Board and is also lead author of “Three Revolutions: Steering Automated, Shared, and Electric Vehicles to a Better Future.”

Gil Tal is director of the Plug-in Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Center at the University of California, Davis.

What electric vehicle sales say about transition off fossil fuels

 

[Merrill]

Good article but doubt the current dodo will get behind it.

 

[mspohr]

A deep dive into our totally corrupt political system where fossil fuel companies run the show.
Big Oil v the planet is the fight of our lives. Democrats must choose a side
Big Oil v the planet is the fight of our lives. Democrats must choose a side | David Sirota